mshiermd

"Experienced in general amateur photography, but not an experienced wildlife photographer. She would probably try to keep the expense under $2,000."

With this response in mind, a Sigma or Tamron 150-600 will do the job. Adding a Sigma or Tamron 1.4 TE will take her out to a very long ~1300 mm. That brings her in at ~$1350. Can she cover the focal lengths of 28-200 with her present kit? Some shots will be shorter but with birds and cats at a considerable distance you need the long range. Would suggest a trial at a camera store to test the ability to autofocus or manual focus with her present rig. I have this setup and it worked wonderfully (see below) A zoom covering the shorter focal lengths and a second body would be highly recommended.

Sony A7R II; Sigma 150-600; Tamron 1.4 Pro TE; F8 1/250 ISO 400 from a bean bag; Type added for a presentation.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

I have noticed that something happens to the quality of the photo at those overly long focal lengths. Yours comes out to over 900mm and the tree trunk looks awful. I'd rather use something like the 100-400mm that would not be so heavy, which on a crop sensor would give field of view out to 600mm allowing for cropping in p/p. I'd go for the sharper photo with the shorter lens.

wotsmith Loc: Nashville TN

Hi everybody,
I am going to join in at the risk of being viewed as a snob or worse. One thing that really bothers me about many comments, is that so many want a 18-600 zoom or something like that. The more zoom the better. There is a love affair with Sigma and other non-OEM brands of lenses.

I am not wealthy, but prior to retiring I had a good income, and so I do have good equipment, like a Canon (I have canon bodies) 600mm f4. Nowhere do I see anyone speak up and mention that prime lenses of excellent quality ALWAYS are sharper than zoom lenses. Not only that with an f4 the focus is also faster or much faster.

If your budget can include a 150 - 600 lens and that is all; you can get some nice pictures and have a lot of fun. But don't think that the sharpness or focusing will match a prime super telephoto. It is just a fact that the optics of a high quality prime will be better than a high quality zoom. The only zoom that I have seen and used (no I don't have one - can't afford it) is the Canon 200-400 with built-in 1.4X which is super, but last I checked it was over $12K.

I am not pushing Canon either over Nikon; I have shot with guys shooting bears in Alaska with Nikon gear, and the the results with the Nikon super telephotos was beyond excellent.

The photo of the bird from Africa was pleasant. however he did not check the download option; and I suspect that enlarged, might be noticeably soft. That said, he brought home a better picture than most visitors to Africa!

A lot of information on this blog is passed on as gospel that is in truth, crap.
150-600 is equal to Canon/Nikon 600mm f4 lenses - thats crap
That you can't handhold a super telephoto - thats crap
That adding a 2x teleconverter degrades the quality - at least for the latest Canon 2x with Canon 600mm f4 is crap
rarely is the fact mentioned that since the 150-600 zooms are f5.6 or higher, they won't autofocus as well as f4 primes; may not autofocus at all.

I do recognize that everyones budget is different. Mine is radically different than 5 years ago. My first decent longer lens was a 100-400 that is no longer made. I was thrilled and got some pretty good photos. But as I got better and could afford larger investments I got better gear. Am I having more fun now? not sure about that, but I am getting better photos.

I will post some photos with my 600mm F4 and then a couple with the same lens with a 2x; most shots were hand held and the body was a 1DX which is 18.1 MB I encourage you to download and check out the "crispness" at more magnification. I attempted to focus on the eye of the bird rather on the body. Check out the last two with the 2x teleconverter, is there degradation of quality? Not significantly anyway. I also need to mention that the newest versions of the Canon 600mm and the teleconverters are very significantly sharper and faster focusing than the version I lens and version ii teleconverter. I owned the older ones and upgraded to the latest versions and noted a significant improvement. Sold the earlier gear for more than I paid, so I am hoping my investments in lenses will not cost me a lot in the long run.

My comments are offered in a good spirit, but I felt that they had to be made. If you think you are taking good bird photos, I would suggest that you visit dougbrownphotography.com, birdsasart.com, and deepgreenphotography.com. When I do that it is very humbling, but inspires me to try harder.
Cheers

(Download)

600 f4 on tripod in fishing boat

(Download)

600 mm f4 on tripon in fishing boat

(Download)

600 f4 handheld - download and check out fibers around bill

(Download)

600mm f4 with 2x handheld from fishing boat

(Download)

600 mm f4 with 2x handheld from fishing boat

(Download)